Welcome

Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

I have read quite a few threads on criminalization even but it still makes me feel weird or something. It's like they treat him as a monster. I dunno. Maybe he is. Not much in the article. However, where is the other person's responsibility too?

Consenting adults - need to use protection. If you don't want to risk getting an STI or HIV, use a condom.

I feel that we (HIV+) and others (HIV-) both share a responsibility. Don't trust anyone.

Makes me feel even more tainted than I already am. Does it get any easier? Does it still sting for LTS to see this crap? I dunno... just thought I'd post because it hit close to home

"I know this may be a harsh view,but if you end up with aids,you must have wanted it! We have had 30+ years of aids awareness so there is no excuse anymore except in rare cases. I think young people see the ads for the drugs and see the happy,healthy looking people and think it's nothing,when in fact the people are models,and sometimes the side effects from the drugs are worse than the aids itself."

I have read other posts on here over the past year about reading comments on like YouTube, etc. and how upsetting it can be... the hatred, etc. so I just typically don't read comments on that sort of thing because I don't think I am at a mental place that I can absorb it and let it roll off me. Still trying to come to terms with it all and stuff... Not ready for the hatred towards me just because I am HIV+

"I know this may be a harsh view,but if you end up with aids,you must have wanted it! We have had 30+ years of aids awareness so there is no excuse anymore except in rare cases. I think young people see the ads for the drugs and see the happy,healthy looking people and think it's nothing,when in fact the people are models,and sometimes the side effects from the drugs are worse than the aids itself."

And I bet this is from a person that has unprotected sex with his partner, but thinks he is safe because he is monogamous (supposedly). Humans... so quick to judge, and so naive...

"I know this may be a harsh view,but if you end up with aids,you must have wanted it! We have had 30+ years of aids awareness so there is no excuse anymore except in rare cases. I think young people see the ads for the drugs and see the happy,healthy looking people and think it's nothing,when in fact the people are models,and sometimes the side effects from the drugs are worse than the aids itself."

"I know this may be a harsh view,but if you end up with aids,you must have wanted it! We have had 30+ years of aids awareness so there is no excuse anymore except in rare cases. I think young people see the ads for the drugs and see the happy,healthy looking people and think it's nothing,when in fact the people are models,and sometimes the side effects from the drugs are worse than the aids itself."

That comment would have been considered reasonable circa 2000. A few years after the "miracle one pill a day" news was available to be misinterpreted, everyone talked about that theme.

The problem with HIV is that every single issue, every single experience in the long history, manages to still hold traction to certain people, both HIV+ and HIV-. You'll find HIV- people who are like time capsules of 1985 knowledge of HIV, still believing its absolutely the same. Or 1993. Or 2000. etc etc. Also, information/media illiterate people, though well intentioned, go to the intertubes and believe whatever halfassed piece of dated or misinformation they read.

Forrest, it took me awhile to get used to a lot of the different ways HIV+ people are confronted with bias, anger, hatred, meprise, fear, blame, discrimination, etc. So one of the solutions is time.

Another is to fight back in some of the areas of discrimination or ignorance that confront you personally. Also there is a key switch in your mind that has to go off so you fully feel that HIV is only a shitty virus and that's it.

It does help you learn to open your eyes even wider about how people are trapped by their limited knowledge and constrained by their fears, beliefs and prejudices. If its not HIV or HIV+ people, its something or someone else. The actions of a couple of Muslim "fundamentalist" nutjobs cause widespread fear and hatred of all "A-rabs" including the family living up the block, "just don't feel comfortable around them" "I would prefer not having to deal with them, they make me afraid".

Dividing the world into "us and them". My father detested this sort of thing, he had radar for locating this attitude and behavior in people and when I was growing up, he would just use that code term "us and them" to guide me how to think and feel about such limited consciousness in people.

Probably you have to fight back on some of these instances of people or society feeling they are the "us" and putting HIV+ people into the "them". If you just need to decrease your own hurt and pain, from the bias, the cure might not even require permanent fighting back. And it might not be necessary that you fight HIV criminalisation - probably doing anything that breaks down one wall helps you personally not suffer when other people throw up walls.

« Last Edit: June 02, 2012, 06:34:46 AM by mecch »

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

I think the Comment 3 author is, hmmm, opined yet uneducated, not HIV positive but negative, not a Christian but wears the t-shirt. Enjoys the anonymous podium.

Reading comments after articles has become my guilty pleasure. I have found some of the funniest, truly funny, responses to various topics. If I were on a comedy writing team, I'd be mining Comments Shafts daily.

If this dissolves into a cuntry sort of thread, I'll just have to sit back in amazement and wait for the lock-down.

There was just a story posted at The Body about criminalization. I was surprised by the Iowa statistic. And, also about the origins. I was not aware that the Ryan White Act of 1990 was partly responsible, because the law required states to prosecute. They say that was dropped in 2000, when it was reauthorized. The stats of gay men, especially young gay men, in favor of prosecution were interesting.

There was just a story posted at The Body about criminalization. I was surprised by the Iowa statistic. And, also about the origins. I was not aware that the Ryan White Act of 1990 was partly responsible, because the law required states to prosecute. They say that was dropped in 2000, when it was reauthorized. The stats of gay men, especially young gay men, in favor of prosecution were interesting.

Yeah I agree, attitudes and laws in many states are still stuck in the 1980s, when people thought AIDS and HIV were one and the same (which they are not) and when everyone thought it was like a plague from the 1500s or something. Many states still have laws that seem to think it is still 1985. Granted, in the 1980s, a lot of people were dying, but that was just because we didn't yet understand it yet. There is SO much ignorance out there. HIV is preventable, of course, but it is also totally manageable and not a death sentence. I hate when people in the mass media still refer to HIV as AIDS, which implies it is a death sentence, and which only whips up more fear and ignorance about it. I see HIV as a chronic condition, and AIDS as a disease, which can be treated if caught in time. Now as far as criminalization, I don't think someone should knowingly go around and infect a bunch of people, but sex is a TWO-way street! Do these people want to prosecute someone with TB for coughing on them? Or someone with a bad strain of flu for sneezing on them? Ridiculous. Plus, in most cases, it's impossible to prove. Positive people should disclose their status of course, but when negative people have bareback sex, they have to assume the risk that goes along with it. Plain and simple.

Geez, I go away on a little vacation, and I miss another thread on my favorite topic of criminalization.

All of these laws (and the prosecutions) contribute to the stigma of having HIV. In Texas, my body is essentially considered a dangerous weapon. That doesn't make me feel wonderful.

The publicity, sensationalism, and excessive sentencing of criminal HIV transmission, or even potential exposure where no transmission occurs, somehow makes most of the public feel good. I wonder why the public isn't so concerned about the spread of other diseases? In my mind the clear answer is that it is not-so-thinly veiled homophobia.

Logged

"Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love." - Butch Hancock, Musician, The Flatlanders

I do agree that as Adults we BOTH or ALL are suppose to take protection upon ourselves for safe sex. But at the same time when you are HIV+ If you DONT tell the person you are with and you have unprotected sex that is Liable and STUPID. Im sorry. You may not agree. But It completely irresponsible about the disease. NO its not exactly like it was years ago. Yes it can be treated. But people ARE still dying from HIV and complications from it and the medications they are taking. Some of us are lucky enough to live longer. Some not so much. Plus the cost of the disease.-To me at diagnosis it was not the Death sentence that hit me so hard, I know I will die one day...It WILL happen to us all. Its the Cost factors of the disease. They Meds. The Health Risk. Its NOT just the death sentence it self. And I would think if some man or woman did this to your child you would want that person prosecuted in some way--

If you have TB and you do not Protect others YOU can also be prosectuted also. Just like many other infectious diseases. I have seen it happen.

I think comparing TB/the Flu to HIV (someone having unprotected sex ON PURPOSE) is like comparing apples to oranges. Im sure I will be tied up and spanked for this But...well Im sorry....As a community we should be responsible and educating those that dont know as well as protecting them also!

I do agree that as Adults we BOTH or ALL are suppose to take protection upon ourselves for safe sex. But at the same time when you are HIV+ If you DONT tell the person you are with and you have unprotected sex that is Liable and STUPID. Im sorry. You may not agree. But It completely irresponsible about the disease. NO its not exactly like it was years ago. Yes it can be treated. But people ARE still dying from HIV and complications from it and the medications they are taking. Some of us are lucky enough to live longer. Some not so much. Plus the cost of the disease.-To me at diagnosis it was not the Death sentence that hit me so hard, I know I will die one day...It WILL happen to us all. Its the Cost factors of the disease. They Meds. The Health Risk. Its NOT just the death sentence it self. And I would think if some man or woman did this to your child you would want that person prosecuted in some way--

If you have TB and you do not Protect others YOU can also be prosectuted also. Just like many other infectious diseases. I have seen it happen.

I think comparing TB/the Flu to HIV (someone having unprotected sex ON PURPOSE) is like comparing apples to oranges. Im sure I will be tied up and spanked for this But...well Im sorry....As a community we should be responsible and educating those that dont know as well as protecting them also!

You won't be tied up and spanked. I do, however, disagree. I also wonder what exactly hyou DO know about HIV criminalization.

Did you know that a person can get put in jail for decades in many places even is s/he has safer sex, but does not disclose? Did you know that a person can be put in jail for decades even if s/he doesn't transmit the virus? Did you know that a person's life can be utterly ruined by the simple allegation?

I'm starting to think that those in favor of criminalization do not, in fact, know what laws are out there, and how it impacts all of us.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

I do agree that as Adults we BOTH or ALL are suppose to take protection upon ourselves for safe sex. But at the same time when you are HIV+ If you DONT tell the person you are with and you have unprotected sex that is Liable and STUPID. Im sorry. You may not agree. But It completely irresponsible about the disease. NO its not exactly like it was years ago. Yes it can be treated. But people ARE still dying from HIV and complications from it and the medications they are taking. Some of us are lucky enough to live longer. Some not so much. Plus the cost of the disease.-To me at diagnosis it was not the Death sentence that hit me so hard, I know I will die one day...It WILL happen to us all. Its the Cost factors of the disease. They Meds. The Health Risk. Its NOT just the death sentence it self. And I would think if some man or woman did this to your child you would want that person prosecuted in some way--

If you have TB and you do not Protect others YOU can also be prosectuted also. Just like many other infectious diseases. I have seen it happen.

Please provide some kind of link or reference. Because when I try searching for criminal prosecution of the transmission of TB, or syphilis, or gonorrhea, all I get are instances of prosecution of HIV.

Quote

I think comparing TB/the Flu to HIV (someone having unprotected sex ON PURPOSE) is like comparing apples to oranges. Im sure I will be tied up and spanked for this But...well Im sorry....As a community we should be responsible and educating those that dont know as well as protecting them also!

No one said these diseases were the same. Although all can kill. So I would expect some appropriately proportionate level of outrage and prosecution, as there is for HIV transmission. But that just isn't the case.

Logged

"Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love." - Butch Hancock, Musician, The Flatlanders

I do agree that as Adults we BOTH or ALL are suppose to take protection upon ourselves for safe sex. But at the same time when you are HIV+ If you DONT tell the person you are with and you have unprotected sex that is Liable and STUPID. Im sorry. You may not agree. But It completely irresponsible about the disease. NO its not exactly like it was years ago. Yes it can be treated. But people ARE still dying from HIV and complications from it and the medications they are taking. Some of us are lucky enough to live longer. Some not so much. Plus the cost of the disease.-To me at diagnosis it was not the Death sentence that hit me so hard, I know I will die one day...It WILL happen to us all. Its the Cost factors of the disease. They Meds. The Health Risk. Its NOT just the death sentence it self. And I would think if some man or woman did this to your child you would want that person prosecuted in some way--

If you have TB and you do not Protect others YOU can also be prosectuted also. Just like many other infectious diseases. I have seen it happen.

I think comparing TB/the Flu to HIV (someone having unprotected sex ON PURPOSE) is like comparing apples to oranges. Im sure I will be tied up and spanked for this But...well Im sorry....As a community we should be responsible and educating those that dont know as well as protecting them also!

Facts and references or this is just you rubbing one out. And also, as above, why should there be ANY legal issue whatsoever if there is no transmission. Duh. Brilliant legal scholar, oh please do inform us.

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

I can tell this is a bunch of brilliant scholars. Maybe you should infact go rub one our yourself. Anazing how this community of what is suppose to be ppl discussing facts/life and You cont to turn it into a bashing. I see it over abd over in the forum. Thank God I am more intelligent than to need a bunch of idiots in my life even if they are on the Internet.

I have worked in the Medical Field for many (22years) ER to be exact. There have been many cases come through our ER to be medically cleared prior to being incarcerated. And they were charged and served time for there acts.

And my initial statement never said anything to that extent. But you are responsible for you and education and caring about others and not putting others at risk. I was. Responding to those that madr comments making it seem Like thee person has no responsibility. S/he Does have greater responsibility. And as for you getting on to your daughter about using a condom- maybe they did. Maybe it broke. But had she known the person was infected she may have never had sex w said person or at least had the choice. Amazing that someone just posted a couple of weeks ago asked about disclosing about hiv prior to having sex with their new bf. And all the advise given was do it.....but then it seems to change here? Why? You are responsible. But then again this is the internet. And their appears a lot of ppl only like to hear their opinion ....its kinda like myspace. Have a wonderful life may you all live life to its fullest! Good bye

I can tell this is a bunch of brilliant scholars. Maybe you should infact go rub one our yourself. Anazing how this community of what is suppose to be ppl discussing facts/life and You cont to turn it into a bashing. I see it over abd over in the forum. Thank God I am more intelligent than to need a bunch of idiots in my life even if they are on the Internet....But then again this is the internet. And their appears a lot of ppl only like to hear their opinion ....its kinda like myspace. Have a wonderful life may you all live life to its fullest! Good bye

is it my eyesight? is it my age? It seems like it's getting harder and harder to understand some people around here. Hello spellcheck? hello punctuation? hello complete sentences, no run-ons, no fragments, correct tense, matched pronouns, etc?? oh, and why do people often try to compare apples to oranges?

of course we had different things to say in another thread when someone was talking about how and when to disclose. That's vastly different from this subject of other people expecting you to disclose and threatening legal/criminal prosecution for not disclosing.

I think livelaugh wasn't laughing too much; but was upset to hear that people are responsible for their own health and their own body. While it would be nice for all pozzies to disclose, up to 20-25% of HIV-infected Americans don't even know their positive status - so they sure can't disclose and give people the option to not have unprotected sex with them.

personally, since STDs and HIV in actuality affect such a small percentage of people, I wish instead we would make it illegal to spread the flu or a cold to everyone else.

of course we had different things to say in another thread when someone was talking about how and when to disclose. That's vastly different from this subject of other people expecting you to disclose and threatening legal/criminal prosecution for not disclosing.

personally, since STDs and HIV in actuality affect such a small percentage of people, I wish instead we would make it illegal to spread the flu or a cold to everyone else.

And let's bear in mind that the flu kills more people every year than the AIDS. I want people to disclose they have the flu before they shake my hand, or else I'll throw them in jail.

That aside, LiveLaugh is just speaking bullshit. Why only with HIV does it have to be a crime? It only reinforces the stigma and disencourages people from getting tested. I had unprotected sex and got HIV. Whose fault is it? Mine only! If the guy knew he had HIV, he was an asshole for not telling me, but it's still my fault. I would never sue him or something, he didn't force me. People have to start taking responsibility for themselves in their choices, and the government should stay away from that.

is it my eyesight? is it my age? It seems like it's getting harder and harder to understand some people around here. Hello spellcheck? hello punctuation? hello complete sentences, no run-ons, no fragments, correct tense, matched pronouns, etc?? ...

Couldn't agree more! It seems to me, too, that there are a fair amount of posters lately that are using textspeak, iPads and not watching what they type, or replying via mobile phones... I dunno.

I don't mean any disrespect to anyone... but it really does make it hard to read. Honestly, it also lessens the credibility of the writer, too.

I can tell this is a bunch of brilliant scholars. Maybe you should infact go rub one our yourself. Anazing how this community of what is suppose to be ppl discussing facts/life and You cont to turn it into a bashing. I see it over abd over in the forum. Thank God I am more intelligent than to need a bunch of idiots in my life even if they are on the Internet.

I have worked in the Medical Field for many (22years) ER to be exact. There have been many cases come through our ER to be medically cleared prior to being incarcerated. And they were charged and served time for there acts.

And my initial statement never said anything to that extent. But you are responsible for you and education and caring about others and not putting others at risk. I was. Responding to those that madr comments making it seem Like thee person has no responsibility. S/he Does have greater responsibility. And as for you getting on to your daughter about using a condom- maybe they did. Maybe it broke. But had she known the person was infected she may have never had sex w said person or at least had the choice. Amazing that someone just posted a couple of weeks ago asked about disclosing about hiv prior to having sex with their new bf. And all the advise given was do it.....but then it seems to change here? Why? You are responsible. But then again this is the internet. And their appears a lot of ppl only like to hear their opinion ....its kinda like myspace. Have a wonderful life may you all live life to its fullest! Good bye

I'm guessing there might be a coherent thought or two in your post, but I'll be damned if I can find one. Exactly how do you know what happens to every person who comes through your ER? I doubt you know the first thing about disclosure laws and you certainly cannot support any arguments.

I also disagree that there are not brilliant folks here... it only took a couple of replies to your post to expose your true feelings. Come back when you learn to take responsibility for your own actions, without expecting others to do it for you.

I don't understand why those that seem to think HIV Criminalization is a good idea ALWAYS move to disclosure. Just because I think criminalization is a horrible idea (not to mention bad public health policy), does not mean that I don't think people should disclose. Stop trying to confuse issues.I worked in health care for many years too -- let me say that just because you worked in the ER does not mean you know anything about laws or good Public Health Care policies. I met some folks who could deal with the medical issues that walked in to the ER but were fairly ignorant to the social aspects of dealing with and treating human beings.

That and the shrill self-righteous indignation, followed by the apoplectic exits.

I was actually giving LIveLaugh the chance to understand what we were discussing and why. Apparently to no avail.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

ah! now that would make sense - even if their posts don't always seem to make sense.

I check this site on a mobile phone often. I sometimes even reply to stuff, however brief those replies might be.

Sorry, no excuse. Methinks the post on question was not so much text-speak as rage-speak. Odd, considering the flamebait s/he knew s/he was throwing down.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

I do agree that as Adults we BOTH or ALL are suppose to take protection upon ourselves for safe sex. But at the same time when you are HIV+ If you DONT tell the person you are with and you have unprotected sex that is Liable and STUPID. Im sorry. You may not agree. But It completely irresponsible about the disease. NO its not exactly like it was years ago. Yes it can be treated. But people ARE still dying from HIV and complications from it and the medications they are taking. Some of us are lucky enough to live longer. Some not so much. Plus the cost of the disease.-To me at diagnosis it was not the Death sentence that hit me so hard, I know I will die one day...It WILL happen to us all. Its the Cost factors of the disease. They Meds. The Health Risk. Its NOT just the death sentence it self. And I would think if some man or woman did this to your child you would want that person prosecuted in some way--

If you have TB and you do not Protect others YOU can also be prosectuted also. Just like many other infectious diseases. I have seen it happen.

I think comparing TB/the Flu to HIV (someone having unprotected sex ON PURPOSE) is like comparing apples to oranges. Im sure I will be tied up and spanked for this But...well Im sorry....As a community we should be responsible and educating those that dont know as well as protecting them also!

Hey, we're getting better at this. It took four days before someone came in and puked on his shoes.

I do agree that as Adults we BOTH or ALL are suppose to take protection upon ourselves for safe sex. But at the same time when you are HIV+ If you DONT tell the person you are with and you have unprotected sex that is Liable and STUPID. Im sorry. You may not agree. But It completely irresponsible about the disease.

Well maybe we pretty much all agree that it is immoral or selfish to do what LiveLaugh speaks about before the rest of the post goes a meandering.

The problem isn't apples and oranges. The arguments tend to go off track because of "bait and switch".

Doing something immoral or selfish or reckless does not necessarily mean that it should be criminal.

And when specifically we are talking about HIV and laws - 50% of the people do not seem to be able to recognise the difference between laws about transmission and laws about non-disclosure. And many don't seem to understand that laws about non-disclosure can lead to prison terms for non disclosure when there was no transmission, and safesex. Just not saying is enough to convict. Imagine that!

Furthermore, factor in the HAART and undetectable factors, and people arguing these points.... the eyes cross, the systems overload, people resort to bait and switch and hot-button arguments like "what if it were your daughter......" that only play on emotions, not reason.

Not to mention that criminalisation is generally not considered to be preventative for the public, nor especially good for anyone now living with HIV.

While it may seem to be flamebaiting, I don't think it was in LiveLaugh's first post. Its a complicated discussion and I think these threads break down when people are not patient enough or willing enough or able to discuss something complicated.

« Last Edit: June 06, 2012, 03:21:54 AM by mecch »

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

While it may seem to be flamebaiting, I don't think it was in LiveLaugh's first post. Its a complicated discussion and I think these threads break down when people are not patient enough or willing enough or able to discuss something complicated.

My intent in my response to LiveLaugh was to find out exactly how much s/he knows/knew about the topic. Seeing as how in the US (at least) HIV criminalization means a hodgepodge of different things depending on the state, I wanted to be certain we were even discussing the same thing.

Instead of furthering the discussion, LiveLaugh decided to latch on the very first piece of flame thrown at her/him and went totally ballistic, with a dramatic forums "exit" even. Even AFTER prefacing her/his initial post with the acknowledgement that s/he might get "a spanking" for venturing into controversial territory.

Which leads me to believe that a flame fest if exactly what was desired here. And it's sad too, because once again, the chance to clarify and discuss this issue like adults is taken off the rails by an irrational flameout.

Hopefully the thread can get back on track. I really want to hear from someone who can explain to me why unprotected sex with an HIV positive person who does not disclose should be criminalized, even if no transmission occurs.

Moreover, I would like to know why almost every single person publicly prosecuted has been either a gay male or a male person of color.

On top of that, I would like to hear a rational argument as to how, exactly, HIV criminalization has impacted new infections. Specifically, how it has led to more testing, not less - and fewer infections, not more. I would like to know how and if criminalization impacts the stigma associated with HIV infection.

Lastly, I would like to know WHY it is hypocritical to preach personal responsibility for consensual sex for both partners, encourage disclosure for HIV positive persons, yet stop short of putting someone on a very public and often life-ruining trial based almost entirely on hearsay.

I'm really honestly baffled about this.

To me, it not only makes no logical sense, but it assumes a predatory nature is inherent in HIV positive persons that is not inherent in, say, people with syphilis or TB. it's almost as if the virus turns us into lycanthropes, who must contain our newfound dark power and the intoxicating thrill of onward infection.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

My views are evolving on this issue, as I've seen the prosecutions and how HIV is singled out, when other viruses are more easily transmitted and cause more deaths. It does seem based on the homo factor. About the prosecutions, it seems the ones making news are straight, white men.

I admit that I am still conflicted in situations where someone knowingly puts someone at risk. I still have a hard time with that. But, I come back to this virus being singled out, how do you prove disclosure or even infection, and if transmission didn't occur, should there be prosecutions for even cases where there is ample evidence someone went out of their way to have as much unprotected sex as they could. It is a difficult issue, for me.

My intent in my response to LiveLaugh was to find out exactly how much s/he knows/knew about the topic. Seeing as how in the US (at least) HIV criminalization means a hodgepodge of different things depending on the state, I wanted to be certain we were even discussing the same thing.

Instead of furthering the discussion, LiveLaugh decided to latch on the very first piece of flame thrown at her/him and went totally ballistic, with a dramatic forums "exit" even. Even AFTER prefacing her/his initial post with the acknowledgement that s/he might get "a spanking" for venturing into controversial territory.

Which leads me to believe that a flame fest if exactly what was desired here. And it's sad too, because once again, the chance to clarify and discuss this issue like adults is taken off the rails by an irrational flameout.

Hopefully the thread can get back on track. I really want to hear from someone who can explain to me why unprotected sex with an HIV positive person who does not disclose should be criminalized, even if no transmission occurs.

Moreover, I would like to know why almost every single person publicly prosecuted has been either a gay male or a male person of color.

On top of that, I would like to hear a rational argument as to how, exactly, HIV criminalization has impacted new infections. Specifically, how it has led to more testing, not less - and fewer infections, not more. I would like to know how and if criminalization impacts the stigma associated with HIV infection.

Lastly, I would like to know WHY it is hypocritical to preach personal responsibility for consensual sex for both partners, encourage disclosure for HIV positive persons, yet stop short of putting someone on a very public and often life-ruining trial based almost entirely on hearsay.

I'm really honestly baffled about this.

To me, it not only makes no logical sense, but it assumes a predatory nature is inherent in HIV positive persons that is not inherent in, say, people with syphilis or TB. it's almost as if the virus turns us into lycanthropes, who must contain our newfound dark power and the intoxicating thrill of onward infection.

You're right the second post was flamebait. Maybe not the first.

All the points you want discussed are important. Unfortunately you aren't going to get that discussion with LiveLaugh because, well, we can only wonder way. Back got up? Can't discuss something so complicated? Felt vulnerable? Whatever....

Lots of people are very emotional thinkers.

Also lots of people seem to think their personal morality and particular bias should be pursued through the laws of the land.

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Maybe people who conjure up the immoral degenerate evil AIDS spreaders who should be locked up, or shipped to desert islands to starve to death, feel that civil rights advocates are pursuing their own morality in law. Which is in fact immoral, in their eyes.

They probably think equal rights, civil rights, and personal responsibility, advocates, are "immoral". To them, obviously evil AIDS spreaders exist, and must be prosecuted because that's the moral thing to do.

Logged

“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Man Who Gave Woman Genital Herpes Ordered to Pay Nearly One Million Dollars in Damages

To be clear, that was a civil suit, not a criminal charge.

Logged

"Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love." - Butch Hancock, Musician, The Flatlanders

For those of you who might be interested, here's a link to a very informative and in-depth article by our own Sean Strub about HIV criminalization.

I highly recommend that you take a look at it, if you've ever found yourself even remotely thinking about the rationale as to why someone feels it is proper to impose a prison sentence on an HIVer.

Also, take a look at the profiles of three people who found themselves facing stiff (prison) sentences, along with being branded sex offenders, due to these arcane laws on the books.

Hopefully this information will help many of you understand why disclosure, although necessary, is an entirely separate issue when it comes to whether someone should be subject to punishment under the law for (intentional) transmission of this virus we live with... as it appears that in the past these types of threads have tended to yield a general consensus that non-transmission is not the issue of concern.

Seroconverted: Early 80sTested & confirmed what I already knew: early 90s

Current regimen: Atripla. Last regimen: Epzicom, Sustiva (since its inception with NO adverse side effects: no vivid dreams and NONE of the problems people who can't tolerate this drug may experience: color me lucky )Past regimensFun stuff (in the past): HAV/HBV, crypto, shingles, AIDS, PCP

My views are evolving on this issue, as I've seen the prosecutions and how HIV is singled out, when other viruses are more easily transmitted and cause more deaths. ...

I admit that I am still conflicted in situations where someone knowingly puts someone at risk. I still have a hard time with that. But, I come back to this virus being singled out, how do you prove disclosure or even infection, and if transmission didn't occur, should there be prosecutions for even cases where there is ample evidence someone went out of their way to have as much unprotected sex as they could. It is a difficult issue, for me.

I definitely agree. I will admit, too, that I am evolving. When I first joined the forum and read threads like this, I struggled with how in the world could you NOT criminalize... but now... after learning more and seeing different viewpoints, etc. I am certainly in agreement that they are OLD laws and totally bullshit.

The idea that someone can spend 10-20 years in prison for SAFE sex.... ridiculous. And, to be labeled a sex offender??? A sex offender is someone who has raped or molested a child.... not someone who has as an adult has had consensual sex ffs.

I have actually learned from good conversations on this topic versus when they get really personal and ugly. The adult conversations are really beneficial!

I'm not a debater, nor do I like to argue... so I tend to just stay quiet and read a lot... but then again, with everything being so new, I am also forming my opinions on things as well and thus tend to stay quiet and just read.

In late 2009, using laws designed to combat terrorism, Michigan charged Daniel Allen, who has HIV, with “possession of a harmful biological agent” after he was involved in an altercation with a neighbor. Prosecutors equated his HIV infection with “possession or use of a harmful device.”

This reads like something out of the 'Am I Infected?' forum. If saliva is now deemed to be a 'harmful biological agent', I wonder how long it will be before someone presses charges against an HIV+ person for sneezing?

i don't understand how they can compare hiv to influenza influenza is airborne hiv isn't but to have sex with some1 without telling them for the sake of rejection is wrong . people get the false insecurity that both are poz is ok , like i talked to my dr about havig sex with another poz person will be ok if both are on the atripla, is some1 is on multiple pills b/c of resistants , people get the false security that is they're poz it can't get worse frankly it can

i don't understand how they can compare hiv to influenza influenza is airborne hiv isn't but to have sex with some1 without telling them for the sake of rejection is wrong . people get the false insecurity that both are poz is ok , like i talked to my dr about havig sex with another poz person will be ok if both are on the atripla, is some1 is on multiple pills b/c of resistants , people get the false security that is they're poz it can't get worse frankly it can

Here is how you compare them.... they are both viruses. Viruses with the capacity to kill people.

You are correct -- influenza is much, much, much easier to transmit to others AND it causes thousands and thousands of deaths each and every year. So.... if having safe sex with someone and not disclosing your HIV status equals criminal behavior, why shouldn't we criminalize going out in public when you have the flu?? Especially given that very few people take ANY precautions to not transmit, i.e. wear a mask, don't sneeze/cough into your hands, etc.

THAT is how you compare them in this context.

Mike

edited to add: No, I am not advocating criminalizing passing on the flu -- I am just showing the absurdity of singling out ONE virus. Also -- criminalizing HIV and NOT disclosing are separte issues -- stop combining them. Being against criminalization does NOT imply that I don't think people should disclose.

I've been thinking about this thread for a couple of days and I noticed something similar among those who advocate for criminalizing HIV. It seems that many of the posters either believe they were intentionally infected by someone, or they are unwilling to take responsibility for their own health. Many of the arguments seem to take one of these two positions.

For those who believe they were intentionally infected, they seem to want society to do for them, what they failed to do for themselves; i.e. protect their own health. They believe that they were wronged and being unwilling to take any personal responsibility, they want someone, anyone, to punish those who they see as predators.

The other argument I notice is the desire to have the law dictate how two adults should act, when both parties are equally responsible for safer sex. Rather than actually asking a potential partner, about any possible issues. Again, they want the law to require something, that they are either unwilling or unable to ask themselves..

My opinion is that many of these posters are newly infected and unable to be honest with themselves as to who is responsible for their own health. That's why I think it's still very important that we discuss this issue, because far too many folks seem to be seeking revenge through the law.

This reads like something out of the 'Am I Infected?' forum. If saliva is now deemed to be a 'harmful biological agent', I wonder how long it will be before someone presses charges against an HIV+ person for sneezing?

At least there are some sensible people out there...

Court of Appeals rules HIV-infected man's saliva not a weapon

ALBANY, N.Y.—The saliva of an HIV-infected man who bit a police officer doesn't constitute a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument under state law, New York's top court ruled Thursday.

In dismissing the aggravated assault conviction of David Plunkett, the Court of Appeals is sending the case back to a lower court for resentencing.

The 48-year-old Plunkett is serving a 10-year sentence at Sing Sing after pleading guilty to assault as well as aggravated assault on an officer after punching him and biting his finger in 2006 at a medical clinic in the Mohawk Valley village of Ilion.

The court unanimously said saliva should be treated the same as teeth, which it concluded in 1999 don't qualify as dangerous instruments because body parts come with the defendant and cannot heighten their criminal liability beyond the victim's injury.

"Because defendant's saliva too `came with him' -- indeed with his teeth -- its utility for penal enhancement may not be treated differently," Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman wrote. The six other judges concurred.

The officer whose skin was broken by the bite didn't become HIV-infected, though he took antiviral drugs for months afterward, Herkimer County Assistant District Attorney Jeffrey Carpenter said. Plunkett also urinated, defecated and bled during the struggle with two officers, and the court's ruling in effect applies not just to all body parts but also to all bodily fluids, he said.

"I think the decision will place not only the general public but certainly our first responders -- be it police, firefighters, EMTs or paramedics -- in grave danger in the future," Carpenter said. He planned to contact the state district attorneys association and lawmakers to try to get the penal law changed, he said.

The Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund told the court in support of Plunkett that people with HIV shouldn't face extra criminal sanctions or enhanced penalties because they have HIV.

According to the federal Centers for Disease Control, HIV transmissions from bites are "very rare," though medical literature suggests in specific circumstances, with blood-to-blood transmission, it has happened. "There are numerous reports of bites that did not result in HIV infection," the agency said.

Seroconverted: Early 80sTested & confirmed what I already knew: early 90s

Current regimen: Atripla. Last regimen: Epzicom, Sustiva (since its inception with NO adverse side effects: no vivid dreams and NONE of the problems people who can't tolerate this drug may experience: color me lucky )Past regimensFun stuff (in the past): HAV/HBV, crypto, shingles, AIDS, PCP

I've been thinking about this thread for a couple of days and I noticed something similar among those who advocate for criminalizing HIV. It seems that many of the posters either believe they were intentionally infected by someone, or they are unwilling to take responsibility for their own health. Many of the arguments seem to take one of these two positions.

For those who believe they were intentionally infected, they seem to want society to do for them, what they failed to do for themselves; i.e. protect their own health. They believe that they were wronged and being unwilling to take any personal responsibility, they want someone, anyone, to punish those who they see as predators.

The other argument I notice is the desire to have the law dictate how two adults should act, when both parties are equally responsible for safer sex. Rather than actually asking a potential partner, about any possible issues. Again, they want the law to require something, that they are either unwilling or unable to ask themselves..

My opinion is that many of these posters are newly infected and unable to be honest with themselves as to who is responsible for their own health. That's why I think it's still very important that we discuss this issue, because far too many folks seem to be seeking revenge through the law.

Joe

Well said, Joe. I completely agree.

Just because something is morally wrong doesn't mean that it should be punished by law. Having unprotected sex has its risks, which are well known, and engaging in this activity is a choice. People have to take responsibility for their choices, that's it.